Litt 2009.
Methods | RCT; 2 arms; CBT + standard treatment; standard treatment; post‐treatment | |
Participants | End of treatment: n = 54 Start of treatment: n = 54 Sex: 46 F; 8 M Mean age: 41.0 (SD 11.0) Source = dental clinics and dentists (15%); newspaper and web adverts (85%) Diagnosis = temporomandibular disorder Mean years of pain: 5.6 (SD 5.4) |
|
Interventions | CBT + standard treatment; standard treatment (splint, diet, NSAIDs) | |
Outcomes |
Primary pain outcome: MPI 0 to 6 Primary disability outcome: interference MPI 0 to 6 Primary mood outcome: CES‐D Catastrophising outcome: data not available Pain Intensity MPI 0 to 6 CES‐D Depression Interference with activity MPI 0 to 6 2 items modified from Catastrophising Sub‐Scale CSQ Several times daily sampling of pain, control, affect, coping, catastrophising |
|
Notes | CBT versus TAU: analyses 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 2011 update search Yates quality scale: total quality 14/35, design quality 11/26, treatment quality 3/9 |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Computerised urn randomisation |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | Not reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Attrition not reported |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Fully reported |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not reported |